What I would like to see in a future patch

[Cavemaniac]

anyone tried disconnect and reconnect?
that generally sends bombers and strafers off will partial loadouts for me!

Huh!

That's the way I've always forced a launch in a similar way - by selecting, set a target, disconnect, reconnect.

But as pawl says, you simply need to uncheck the auto launch box and they head straight off.

[speef]

I think I probably have a more unit-intensive play style than most people, but...

...could we get some threading?

This game is heavily CPU-bound on my PC. I have an 8-core FX-8320, and CW3 hammers one core and leaves 87% of the CPU idle.  Meanwhile the game is chugging along at Turtle Speed.

The "worst" part of CW3 for me is the fact that it starts to play so very slowly once you get a bunch of stuff going on a large map, and given that even low-end PC's these days have 2+ cores, I'd say it would be a big help to most players to offload some processing into a separate thread.

It looks like some number-crunching would need to be done outside of Unity- not sure how big of a project that is. :)

[Clean0nion]

I think I probably have a more unit-intensive play style than most people, but...

...could we get some threading?

This game is heavily CPU-bound on my PC. I have an 8-core FX-8320, and CW3 hammers one core and leaves 87% of the CPU idle.  Meanwhile the game is chugging along at Turtle Speed.

The "worst" part of CW3 for me is the fact that it starts to play so very slowly once you get a bunch of stuff going on a large map, and given that even low-end PC's these days have 2+ cores, I'd say it would be a big help to most players to offload some processing into a separate thread.

It looks like some number-crunching would need to be done outside of Unity- not sure how big of a project that is. :)

My computer has two cores and it has no issues with using both.

[burguertime]

What I would like to see in a future patch:

UI
-----------------
- Bind Mouse Keys to Actions (like mouse button #5 to pause)
- Clicking on CN UI info panel centers view on said CN.

Colonial Space:
------------------
- Ability to tag maps and up-down vote on tags. The tags would be sorted by votes and only shown after X votes were cast.
- Ability to filter maps by tags.


- Starsystems view to colonial space maps: you could set some filters and some priority (downloaded status, by author, by tag, by size, by #id, etc) and the game would procedurally generate a starsystem view for you, and automatically add new maps to the systems.

.................. IMHO, this listing view to the colonial space was a turn down. I was hoping to see the custom maps on a starsystem... XD

[kerth]

First I have made new topic, then I have found these one.
The only thing I am really missing,

Average time of solving the map created by player.
At least info, but sorting regarding to that time would be also great.

[teknotiss]

i would like some more brush sizes for the editor
at the mo we have
1=1x1
2=3x3
3=5x5
6=11x11
10=19x19

i'd quite like
4=6x6
5=9x9

and it'd be nice to get
11=20x20

living in hope :)

[Cavemaniac]

i would like some more brush sizes for the editor
at the mo we have
1=1x1
2=3x3
3=5x5
6=11x11
10=19x19

i'd quite like
4=6x6
5=9x9

and it'd be nice to get
11=20x20

living in hope :)

Seconded - having brushes at 6x6 and 9x9 are top of my list.

(2 and three units wide)

[Flabort]

size 4 would be 7x7, size 11 would be 21x21. For 6x6, use size 3.5.
So basically having a scale where we can input our desired size as well as slide around is the feature we want.

[Tmug]

I'd like to see a check box type option to change the behavior of terps so that they will concentrate on the closest points first, completing them to the full level specified by the player before moving on to further away points. The way it is now, if you want to terraform a large area efficiently, you have to micromanage the process by only selecting small amounts of terrain at a time so that the terps will complete that area before touching anything else. If you mark off a large area, it can be a long time before ANY of the areas get completed, when you could have been using that space for building as it was completed, instead. I don't think the default behavior necessarily needs to change, but I think it'd be a really nice feature to be able to toggle between that and a behavior that prioritizes the point selection more completely based on the proximity to the terp, so that when you want to, you could use a broad brush to paint a large area for 'terping', without seriously delaying the time until the first usable areas of land are finished.

I'd like to go a bit further on this idea.  Right now, the terp has 1 selection, which is either "normal" mode (raise the terrain one level in one spot, as close to me as possible, then branch out from there, starting with the lowest spot I can reach).  Or the option is (raise the terrain all the way to the specified level in one spot, as close to me as possible, then branch out from there, starting with the lowest spot I can reach).

I'd like to see with simple toggle on/off:    change 1 level at a time, or change all the way to the desired level, then move to next spot (current)

New #1:   Preference toggle -  Raise terrain or lower terrain first (for those terps doing double duty).  Right now, it appears that a terp will raise terrain first, and then lower the terrain if there are no raise requests within reach.

New #2:  Distance toggle - Normal mode is that terain requests close to the terp get priority, then is expands out.  How about a toggle that allows the terp to reach out to its max distance first, then work back towards the terp?

In this manner, a couple of custom-set terps could build a retaining wall and build and dig out a moat to capture the creeper. 

[Flabort]

Actually, they don't favor raising or lowering; They favor the terrain that is furthest from the desired level.

So if you have 1 tile at 6 that you want to raise to 8, and one that you want to raise to 9; even if the 8 is closer, they'll favor the 9 (Without closest first enabled).
If you have one at 9 that you want to lower to 1, and one at 1 that you want to raise to 9, it will favor the closer of those two, regardless of raise or lower.

[4xC]

Regardless, it would be better if terps had settings that lets you customize which ground to terraform and what order to terraform each cell.

As helpful as it is to know what you are terraforming by having all the numbered cells laid out, it sucks that it means you cannot aim for certain spots for certain reasons such as immediately stopping incoming creeper while also trying to fortify your base at the same time.

[kwinse]

At some point there should be a line drawn between settings and leaving it up to the player to micromanage...

[4xC]

That line appears to already be drawn, but very blurred so to speak.

We can already write our own codes like CSC college students, but there are basic gameplay rules.

[teknotiss]

i'd like a "randomise time/strength" etc option in the unit attributes panels
it'd be extra nice if it had another button for each option that is "randomise a little" from the number you set.
(i like to have spores launch in "near to each others time intervals" waves, but i'm not bothered about the precise difference in time)
these would save me a lot of time in the mapping process, especially for spore towers.

[Clean0nion]

i'd like a "randomise time/strength" etc option in the unit attributes panels
it'd be extra nice if it had another button for each option that is "randomise a little" from the number you set.
(i like to have spores launch in "near to each others time intervals" waves, but i'm not bothered about the precise difference in time)
these would save me a lot of time in the mapping process, especially for spore towers.

CRPL. Just keep a script to hand.